This invention relates generally to failure analysis and, more particularly, a method and system for automating failure analysis/maintenance program development procedures.
Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) Analysis is a design review technique that focuses on the development of products and processes. The technique determines actions which will reduce the risk of product field, failures and documents those actions and the review process. RCM is intended to result in preventative actions. RCM is a systematic group of activities intended to: (1) recognize and evaluate potential failures of a product or process and its effects; (2) identify actions which could eliminate or reduce the chance of the potential failure occurring; and (3) document the process.
The Air Transportation Association""s (ATA""s) Maintenance Steering Group 3rd Task Force (MSG-3) is an implementation of RCM. MSG-3 is the only process which is approved by the Federal Aviation Association (FAA) for the development of a Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR) for transport aircraft. MSG-3 procedures are documented in The Airline/Manufacturer Maintenance Program Development Document MSG-3 (hereinafter xe2x80x9cMSG-3xe2x80x9d), prepared by the Maintenance Steering Group-3 Task Force of the Air Transport Association of America, second revision, Sep. 12,1993, which is herein incorporated by reference. MSG-3 provides broad guidance and defines the logic-based analysis process which is used for the initial development of the most economic scheduled maintenance program which will maintain the inherent reliability and safety of an aircraft and its systems.
MSG-3 was originally developed for (and required by) the Major Airlines, and was later adopted by Regional Airlines, and most recently has become demanded by Business Aviation Users. MSG-3 is an expensive, time-consuming process which ties up valuable resources for an extended period of time. For example, the MSG-3 process for a propulsion system takes approximately 2000-2500 man hours. Even though this is a significant amount of time, it has been proven to provide tremendous payback to operators in minimizing preventative maintenance costs. Thus, a need exists for a system which completely and accurately adheres to the MSG-3 guidelines, yet reduces the resources (e.g., man hours) required for completing the process.
In accordance with the present invention, an apparatus and method allow a user to perform automated failure analysis for a system. In a preferred embodiment of the invention, the analysis is compliant with MSG-3 procedures.
In accordance with another aspect of the invention, the system is defined hierarchically. The highest level of the hierarchy is the system level. The next level is the subsystem level, followed by the sub-subsystem level and the parts level. A lower level (e.g., a part) can be included by any higher level (e.g., a sub-subsystem, a subsystem or a system). The system is defined in terms of functions. A function can include one or more failures. A failure can include one or more effects. An effect may have one or more causes.
In accordance with still another aspect of the invention failure analysis is performed at the Maintenance Significant Item (MSI) level. By definition, a part is an MSI. A subsystem or a system can also be defined to be an MSI. Failure analysis provides the user with questions whose answers are used to categorize the failure as: an evident safety failure; an evident operational failure; an evident economic failure; a hidden safety failure; or a hidden non-safety failure. Based on the failure category, the user is provided with a list of task types which may be performed.